RULING ON D'ARKENT v. RUTHERN

[MCVDK 2854]

RULING OF D’ARKENT v. RUTHERN

Presiding Justice

Basileios Balthazar Baelius

 

Plaintiff

Joseph d’Arkent

 

Defendant

Mary Ruthern nee Carrington

 

Witnesses / Submission Testimonies

Peter Baldwin d’Arkent

Victoria Anne d’Arkent

Emma Elaine d’Arkent

 

The Circuit Court, presided by Judge Basileios Balthazar Baelius CCJ, verdicts on the following issues presented by the Plaintiff; 

 

I - The rightful custody of the d’Arkent children belongs to the father of the children.

 

II - The regency clause of the Baroness of Carrington written will is invalid. 

 

The Circuit Court, presided by Judge Basileios Balthazar Baelius CCJ, verdicts; 

 

    I - On the Subject of the Custody of the d’Arkent children

Within the rights granted by the Oren Revised Code, henceforth referred to as the ORC, under CH302; “It is the obligation of the father to care for the child. [ORC 302.014]” & the threshold set within the Court; “the threshold of 'care' to be a strict one, ensuring that the children receive the most provision reasonably available. [Threshold of ‘Care’]” 

 

It is clearly noted within the above that it must be the duty of the father to care for the children of their own offspring. It is within the opinion of the Court, that Mr. Joseph d’Arkent passed the above mentioned threshold of ‘Care’ as set within the Court. Mr. Joseph d’Arkent is therefore eligible to care and provide for the children of his own offspring. As a result of such, Mr. d’Arkent shall be granted the full custody of the children d’Arkent.

 

    II - On the Subject of Rightful Regency of the Carrington Estate

The Plaintiff within the Court has displayed a multitude of reasons against the capability of the late Baroness of Carrington. It is noted within the ORC under CH708; “A designated regent is chosen by the capable lord, to administer and rule in the name of the lord or his heir in the case of incapability of the office holder. The person or persons designated to rule as regent is to be defined and listed with the will of the office holder. [ORC 708.02]” wherein the specific notion of ‘capable’ shall be noted. 

 

The Court has heard the witness testimonies of the following individuals; Peter Baldwin d’Arkent, Joseph d’Arkent and Emma Elaine d’Arkent, wherein the Court has seen a consistent notion of Lady Mary Lucille d’Arkent being within breachment of the ORC. Therefore within breachment of the ORC CH703; “The duty to maintain their estates, manage them with good nature and uphold the law of the Imperial State within their estates, and to prohibit any estates’ decline into decadence and debauchery. [ORC 703.01]”. Furthermore, Lady Mary Lucille d’Arkent’s will display the clear misunderstanding, as well as misuse, of the laws of the Empire. 

 

The Court therefore sees fit to deem Lady Mary Lucille d’Arkent as incapable by the time of her death. As a result of such, the Court shall verdict the regency clause of Lady Mary Lucille d’Arkent’s will as invalid and thereby the regency of Miss Mary Jane Ruthern nee Carrington as invalid. Therefore; the choice of regency, until the firstborn son of Lady Mary Lucille d’Arkent reaches proper age, shall be provided by the authority of the Crown.

[ErikAzog 3575]

“Justice is done.” says the Duke of Sunholdt, going to raise his glass to his son Joseph as they celebrated their victory.

[BenevolentManacles 2232]

Edward Selm sweats profusely, the humid Helena unkind to his pores. He coughs into his hand a few times before collecting his various papers from the courtroom. He would not be working for free again.